Few people come as quickly to the defense of George McGovern as McGovern himself. The antiwar senator from South Dakota lost to Richard Nixon in a landslide in the 1972 presidential election, only to see Nixon, caught up in the Watergate scandal, resign in disgrace. For McGovern, though—along with many Democrats who followed him—the damage was done, and the now retired politician has spent decades defending the electability of antiwar liberals, insisting his campaign was undone by dirty tricks and bad luck. In recent years, McGovern, 86, hasn't relinquished the spotlight, condemning the war in Iraq and declaring Barack Obama, whom he endorsed after initially supporting Hillary Clinton, a "second Abraham Lincoln." McGovern, author of Abraham Lincoln, a short biography of the Civil War president published this week, talked with U.S. News about political history, corruption, and his expectations for Obama. Excerpts:
You've written a biography of Lincoln at the same time the next president is modeling his inauguration after Honest Abe. Coincidence?
It is a coincidence, but a happy one. Lincoln was not only our greatest president but one of our continuing great treasures. He has not only inspired Barack Obama but multitudes of other Americans. You've called Obama "a second Lincoln," but you originally supported Hillary Clinton for president. What made you change your mind?
I didn't know Senator Obama when he announced for president. I hadn't even met him. I knew Hillary going back to my '72 campaign. But as I saw that campaign unwind, I realized that Barack Obama may well be the man of the hour. It also became clear before I left Hillary that she couldn't win the nomination even if she won all the remaining primaries. Why do you consider Obama another Lincoln?
I think he is a healing figure and yet hasn't surrendered his convictions. I think he is very careful not to come across as a radical. He tries to appeal to common sense, and he is willing to make compromises. I also think that both Lincoln and Barack have a deep and abiding faith in our founding ideals.
It's clear in your book that you admire Lincoln not just for his speeches but for his ability to play political hardball. Do you see that in Obama?
Yes, I do. I think he had the best organized, most brilliantly conceived presidential campaign we may ever have had. If I do say it, mine was in that same category. I don't think we made a mistake in the year and a half leading up to winning that nomination. After that, we ran into all kinds of difficulty. Your vice presidential pick in 1972, Thomas Eagleton, admitted he had been hospitalized for nervous exhaustion and had undergone electro-shock therapy.
Yes, the Eagleton matter took the momentum out of our campaign. It would have been an uphill fight all the way, but to have a blow like that come on the first thing I did after I was nominated, which was to pick a running mate, we never recovered from that. Did you see shades of Eagleton in John McCain's pick of Sarah Palin as a running mate?
No, because I think John McCain knew what he was getting when he picked Sarah Palin. You mean you think she was thoroughly vetted?
No, I don't think she was thoroughly vetted, but I think they pretty well knew that she wasn't concealing any scandals or any sicknesses or anything like that. I do think in the long run the selection of Sarah Palin hurt John McCain. At first, it was kind of a novelty, and she's an attractive woman and carried off her acceptance speech at the convention with certain fanfare. Then, it began to settle in on the country, her lack of experience and knowledge, and she just wasn't ready to take over the White House. Do you think Obama really will change the tone in Washington ?
American political figures need to quit talking about red states and blue states, as though we're in foreign countries. Since Reagan, it has seemed like the solid South and much of the Midwest was locked up by the Republicans. Barack won Virginia, he won Florida, he won North Carolina, and he also won the states out West. I think he has erased the red state-blue state way of judging American politics.